W3C logo Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) logo | EOWG Home

EOWG Minutes, May 25, 2001


Action List Summary

CL: Action for CL: Working on writing expansions of bulleted items.

CL: Action for JB: W3C logo not loading.

WL: Action for WL: Assure checkpoints are all covered, with the items in this appendix. Check that the document design works as a paper version.

CL: Action for CL: Write expansions of list items and send to AA by 2001-05-28.

AA: Action for AA: Will post with Chuck Letourneau's updates to group next Tuedsay, 2001-05-29.

JB: Action for JB: Ask Håkon Lie and Bert Bos to comment on CSS stylesheet applicability treatment.


DS: Doyle Saylor, Wells-Fargo, (W-F) San Francisco
I am steering Web Accessibility with Web Voice Browsers at W-F. Currently 3 million users do connect to W-F this way. This is the largest user-connected bank in US. Plan to do WCAG Level A for whole on-line site. Realize importance of and offer to support WAI in developing business case. Neil Jacobson, VP at WF is an associate, who encouraged my participation.

Outreach Update

CL: David Fallon, Equal Access, PTY Ltd, is a consultant from Australia, He has met with Canadian government personnel. Happy with the visit and contacts. JB lead him to CL. Next week, some representative from Hong Kong is coming to Canada for similar purpose. Mary Francis Laughton is arranging.

Len Kasday Memorial

JB: Yesterday many WAI friends were present at Len Kasday's memorial service in Philadelphia. Len was chair of the WAI Evaluation and Repair working group.

JB: Have received many comments and testimonials to Len and will compile them for the WAI web site.

JB: Institute on Disabilities at Temple is organizing a scholarship in his name.

HB: Encourage WAI to check its resource links to include the fine list of resources on Len's homepage:


HB: Encouraged Diane Nelson Bryen, Ph.D., Executive Director and Professor, Temple University Institute on Disabilities/UAP, to find someone to finish Len's adaption of the WAVE accessibility checker to the US Section 508, currently in alpha release. I believe that the simplicity of WAVE checking of any URL is important to this extended application. I introduced Wendy Chisholm to Dr. Bryen, Wendy is interested in helping with (or helping find someone to help) the completion of that Section 508 tool.

JB: W3C is not a policy-making body, so has tried to avoid developing resources specific to Section 508.

IT Accessibility 2001 Conference Program

HB: Attended sessions Tuesday and Wednesday at US National Institute for Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland. Focus was primarily on Section 508 Law for US government. Many gave credit to WAI leadership. Speakers who shared WAI message included Gregg Vanderheiden, Larry Goldberg, Tom Wlodkowski, Jim Fruchterman, George Kerscher, Sheela Sethuraman, and Mike Paciello.

HB: Companies reviewing their accessibility work to accommodate Section 508 included Oracle, Microsoft, and Sun.

Coming Soon

CL: Formal announcement next week: Starling Access is being absorbed. Chuck will be chief accessibility officer for "The Internet Institute." They haven't yet but will make all their training accessible, through all their business. This will give him resources to support his [wide-ranging accessibility] work.

JB: Wednesday June 6 will start a new EOWG meeting at 4:00 p.m. EST. General information at the first meeting, as expect to be new people, particularly from the Pacific region.

JB: Friday June 22, in Amsterdam, Netherlands, an EOWG face-to-face or educational/recruiting meeting is still likely. Only about 4 of 16 EO members who have responded so far have indicated they can attend.

JB: A National Council of Disabilities meeting where WAI should be present conflicts with the EOWG face-to-face.

Accessibility in Other W3 Work

MR-K: Charles McCathieNevile and I submitted a paper Accessible Graphics and Multimedia in Web for the forthcoming HFWeb (Human Factors Web) conference. We also sent it as a review reminder to WAI Protocols and Formats (PF) group.


WL: Excellent paper, with many detailed example images. It is a joy to have real-world examples.

CL: Excellent.

AA: Likewise.

JB: PF has concern for interaction with other specs.

M-RK: Also relation to XML guidelines, and what to include about them.

WL: Writing about the XML guidelines for any application of XML. These guidelines are intended for guidance in making accessible XML. The XML Accessibility Guidelines will only be a note.

JB: Concern about the proliferation of specifications.

[ed: Fear many divergences among accessibility interpretations, don't track latest guidelines as they evolve.]

WL: What appears to be overlap can be considered simultaneity.

M-RK: Would like to test the XML guidelines for designing applications.

WL: Expect the accessibility guidance will move into schema work as well.

M-RK: Enriched content to the web with XML and RDF. Wish for consistent means to achieve this.

WL: "In-reach" of EOWG to rest of W3C. Those making XML 2 should include accessibility. It will pertain to everything within W3C that is expressed using XML.

M-RK: We have heuristics. Think about examples and context that they need when designing.

WL: The paper was submitted for presenting at thei 7th Conference on Human Factors and the Web conference June 19 in Austin, TX.


[ed. I don't find this paper or any related topic, nor any author recognizable as contributing to WAI in their posted proceedings.]

JB: Summary: Good reaction to examples and detail. May need to clarify how these will mate with other guidelines and how heuristics fit in with other W3 developments/technical recommendations.

Auxiliary Benefits of Accessible Design for Business Case

JB: Draft for this Appendix has been submitted by Alexander Arch:


[ed: Many of the following comments have already been incorporated into the document, and will be further updated by 2001-05-29. Consequently, some details below are obsolete.]

CL: Wish more explanation, rather than the terse bulleted list outlining issues for each topic.

CL: Action for CL: Write brief expansions of bulleted items and send to AA by 2001-05-28.

AA: Agree, but this is a start, lists that suggest what may be covered. Agree to add a few lines about each.

CL: Proof list: add semantic web reference. Improved, will help by adding some of this. Could be within metadata.

WL: As an appendix, it will be referenced independently.

JB: At the top, are links back into the original business case doc.

CL: Writing new intro.

JB: Some headers may need adjustment if they are parallel.

WL: last two refer to people, others to content.

WL: Put "Usability for all visitors" first.

JL: Agree about headings.

Improve Search Engine Listings and Resource Discovery

WL: Alt tags are a subset of text alternatives.

CL: Interpreted descriptions or explanations of graphics to help understand the visual.

WL: Descriptions with their formatting is a decision for someone else, Using a definition list model, term is the bulleted text, definition is the example/expansion.

WL: Should the description be narrative, or as a definition list?

JB: The expected user for this appendix is in a corporate setting, who needs to help make the business case to high-level management by documenting auxiliary benefits. A reader pressed for time would want a clear process list.

WL: Agree.

AA: Agree.

CL: What I am to do: help fill in general purpose of major headings,

CL: Action for JB: W3C logo not loading.

JB: Initial Investment format example is desirable. A good model is in its second head.


HB: Suggest writing more expansive phrases leading into discussion.

WL: Address server maintenance [ed. broken links] and low-bandwidth are topics.

WL: Objective is situational based improvement in usability for all, including non-disabled.

JB: Purpose for document goes above and beyond those with disabilities, and needs to be included in the introduction.

WL: Personal Digital Assistant user is one class of beneficiary.

HB: Concern for including a flat structure with a large number of links in a document. They may be inappropriate for PDA or mobile phone delivery.

JB: Guidelines cover that, we don't need to.

WL: Improve usability for all visitors.

DS: Improve development tools to reflect guidelines.

JB: Finds little support for getting messaging and authoring tools to support WCAG/AT guidelines. May need a new appendix on benefits of using authoring tools that conform to these AT guidelines.

JB: We need a section on help with choosing software.

Repurpose content for multiple formats/devices

HB: Include statement about XML.

WL: Generally apply to W3 products.

JB: Was the content used from the original outline?

AA: Looked at it before and after writing the submission.

[ed: Presumably that original will be removed from end of document in the next revision.]

JB: Disability matrix: Which checkpoint are tied to which group? Risk in breaking out. If primary target audience is corporate, should we give a shopping list? It could backfire.

WL: Purpose: assertain that everything is included from guidelines.

JB: Could do reverse, rather than check each guideline checkpoint is included somewhere, seek auxiliary benefits for each guideline. Then for those with any, make sure they are covered.

WL: Action for WL: Assure checkpoints are all covered with the items in this appendix. Check that the document design works as a paper version.

DS: What works for corporate user: agree full coverage. Clarity for less-informed audience, why this is important.

WL: Make sure there is stand-alone readability.

Reach a Multilingual Audience

JB: Can reach with alternative caption track. Use an additional modality. Header: Make caption "Improve Internationalization."

DS: This is a most important attention getter. It is a revenue-enhancer.

JB: This increases market share. May be an h2. with others as h3.

JB: Documents with clean format and content are more readily translatable.

JB: Revise into two groups: Efficiency and Market Share.

WL: We plan that other documents will link to this.

WL: This is the "Electronic Curb-cuts" document. May be a literature stuffer.

JB: Need to get whole resource suite releasable. Each appendix has important stand-alone value.

WL: There is no W3 usability effort? [ed: believe answer is "no."]

DS: This is pertinent to current work.

JB: Missing is discussion of "Low Literacy levels." Put into Market Share.

DS: Show relation to this: Less than 50% of world is "literate."

JB: Expand situational, noisy environment.

CL: Action for CL: Will do update next draft and send to AA by 2001-05-28.

AA: Action for AA: Will post with CL updates to group next Tuedsay, 2001-05-29.

JB: Needs discussions of the effect of low bandwidth, and avoiding presentational clutter. Mention stylesheets.

JB: Action for JB: Ask Håkon Lie and Bert Bos to comment on CSS stylesheet applicability treatment.

WL: Low bandwith is a legacy issue?

AA: No, it is still a mobile phone, and a developing country issue.

JB: Should keep separate the issues of devices from connectivity to them.

Next Meetings

Friday, June 1, 2001, 8:30 a.m. (EST), 617-252-7000.

Plan to attend if you can the new meeting
Wednesday, June 6, 2001, 4:30 p.m. (EST). Number to be announced.

Last updated 1 June, 2001 by Judy Brewer, jbrewer@w3.org

Copyright © 2001 W3C® (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply. Your interactions with this site are in accordance with our public and Member privacy statements.